Is \rem valid in PT8

Question

I’m just learning my way around PT8, so this might be a silly question, but:

Is the USFM code \rem valid in PT8? If yes, why do lines with \rem preceding make it through into Print Draft? [The latest USFM document I have is v. 2.4. Has that been superseded in PT8?]

舊文章 - 以原文顯示

Answer 1

Paul:

Or do I understand from your comment that it is “so new that you may need Paratext 8.1” that USFM 2.4 is valid for PT8?

Yes, Paratext 8.0 only supports USFM 2.x.

EDIT: Also, for documentations sake, it turns out this was caused by a character style in the \rem line (specifically \bk).

舊文章 - 以原文顯示

Answer 2

Paul:

The latest USFM document I have is v. 2.4.

You can easily see the latest USFM standard by Googling it.

舊文章 - 以原文顯示

Comments

So it looks like the newest version is 3.0? Is there no PDF available? It would sure be nice to download it for reference; my internet right now is taking about five minutes to load a page, and I’m not even sure what I’m looking for will be included there…

舊文章 - 以原文顯示

---

More specifically, if you go to paratext.org, there’s a link at the bottom to “Scripture Markup (USFM/USX)” which should take you to the very latest:
https://ubsicap.github.io/usfm/

Note that USFM 3.0 is so new that you may need Paratext 8.1 (and set your project to USFM 3, under Project Properties and Settings > Advanced) in order to use all of its features. But that shouldn’t matter for an older marker like \rem

https://ubsicap.github.io/usfm/identification/index.html?highlight=rem#rem

Regarding the original question: If data in an \rem field is making it through Print Draft, I’m guessing that’s a bug. (Is anyone in this forum aware of good reasons for printing this data?) Could you use Help > Report a Problem to report it?

舊文章 - 以原文顯示

---

Thanks for the direct link to that page, anon468618; it just takes minutes to load here… If someone could compile a PDF of 3.0, it would be most welcome! Or do I understand from your comment that it is “so new that you may need Paratext 8.1” that USFM 2.4 is valid for PT8? Well, in any case, a PDF would be great for offline reference!

Anyway, it looks like \rem is still valid in SUFM 3.0, so it must be a bug. I’ll try reporting it.

舊文章 - 以原文顯示